MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095296046 · doi:10.1116/1.3698602

Secondary electron deposition mechanism of carbon contamination

2012· article· en· W2095296046 on OpenAlexaff
Adam F. G. Leontowich, Adam P. Hitchcock

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vacuum Science & Technology B Nanotechnology and Microelectronics Materials Processing Measurement and Phenomena · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityBrockhouse Institute for Materials Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeposition (geology)Carbon fibersElectron beam-induced depositionMaterials scienceFluenceTransmission electron microscopyIonizationContaminationScanning electron microscopeAbsorption (acoustics)Analytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryScanning transmission electron microscopyNanotechnologyEnvironmental chemistryComposite materialIonGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deposition of a carbonaceous contaminant layer on surfaces exposed to radiation exceeding 7–10 eV is ubiquitous in many fields of research. The mechanism of this deposition process is still debated. A scanning transmission x-ray microscope has been used to create and interrogate carbonaceous deposits with photon energies spanning the C 1s ionization edge. For equal fluence, the rate of carbon deposition is proportional to the x-ray absorption spectrum of the deposited material. The results are consistent with a deposition mechanism involving secondary electrons. Implications of this measurement with regard to future generations of high volume photolithography are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vacuum Science & Technology B Nanotechnology and Microelectronics Materials Processing Measurement and PhenomenaSame topicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207